2.. maybe 3 points.
It isn't that hard to score if you know anything about strategy. It isn't that hard to defend if you know anything about strategy.
Contradictory. Saying both are easy is not possible. If Offense is easy, then Defense is hard. The reverse could also be said. Both, however, cannot be easy. That's not to say "it is possible to score" and "it is possible to defend" are not true statements. Those would not be contradictory statements, and would indicate a balanced game. If that was your intent, then its a decent idea to convey. If your intent was to imply that it is easy to do both, that is a fallacy. If -you- find it easy to do both, that simply means that you or your team are a standard deviation or two above everyone else. However, someone playing against you, would have a hard time defending, and a hard time offending, if your group was indeed having an easy time attacking and an easy time defending.
its just less "fun" because players are getting better, so its harder for all
i think its not DB related
Not a true fallacy, but an interesting comment. If people are not having fun, because people have become too good at the current confines of the game, it will only get worse with time. Therefore, it is logical that "DB" adapt to allow more room for variance, and thus keep the game from getting progressively worse.
On a final note... I don't really agree with the boosting comments from either side... I think both sides are a bit overly zealous in their stances. If any change were to be thought about being made, I would prefer to see a test of reduced boosting, so that the boosts aren't quite so extreme. People could still "chain boost" which would still allow an extra player (midfielder) to get back on defense, and a second extra to walk in slightly later. It is something to consider.
Note: "Chain boosting" is when more than one cannon fire is imployed to get a person to the other side of the field. There are 3 types of chain boosting.
-Double/triple boost: Two (or 3) players hit a teammate at once sending him further
-Linked Boosts: 2 players are next to each other, and once is further down field. One of the two boosts the other, who lands near the man further down field. Then one of them bosots the other.
-Traditional Chain: Three players near each other. One player may boost the other two down, but more likely, #1 gets boosted by #2, and #2 gets boosted by #3. Then, upon landing, or even in the air if they are close enough, #2 boosts #1.
In any of those cases, the first man gets back to defense quickly, and the second man is at a decent distance to run in and help defend or be an outlet.
Oh.. btw.. not really a serious suggestion... but somethign I think would be funny... in like another April Fools or something like that... To boost people, you have to run up to them and hit them with your cannon. Instead of flying, then are latched onto your cannon. and a charger slowly starts to fill. Pressing fire again at any point on the charger sends them flying. Speed/distance proportional to amount of charge. Charge scales more than speed increase, so that people who charge all the way aren't down the field at the same time of people who got quick shot... (IE, more distance, longer time from charge to arrival; Shorter distance, shorter time from charge to arrival; for a point approx 40 meters in front.) Person who is latched to be boosted can right click at any time to dislodge. "Carrier" movement is slowed to half speed while holding a teammate
Again, not really the best idea, but I thought it would be funny to look at, people holding up other people on their guns and launching them =p You could use ragdoll for the flight until they land =p
Again.. I must repeat.. that was not a serious game balance idea... (although it would be interesting) just a random thought that I thought looked funny in my imagination.
